Expanding the D&D brand?

[Kzach]

Dude, I run a 4E game. MY game has a compelling story because I'm a storyteller by nature. D&D as a product, however, lacks a compelling story to draw a wide swath of people into the world from outside the game.

This isn't about individual, private games, this is about the product as expressed by the designers, the marketers, and the tie-in products.

Which is why I think a well-done cartoon could be the vehicle behind which a greater level of market penetration could be achieved. It could be the 'compelling story', like Pokemon or Transformers has, that drives people to the brand, and the 'brand' would be the D&D P&P game at its core with peripheral products in tow, like figurines, action figures, board games, books, comics, etc.

As long as that 'compelling story' included in it some core component of the D&D P&P game, like Pokemon does with its CCG and toys, and aimed at a slightly older market, ie. the Young Adult market, I think it could be real winner.

Again, it would have to be well done and cleverly incorporate D&D P&P elements which I think is definitely the tripping point for its success or failure. If it can bring all the elements together and be popular then we could see a new age of D&D; forget a renaissance.

The only problem with this concept is that it essentially relies on bringing in new blood as opposed to uniting old blood. Playing D&D with people under 30 is... well... not my cup of tea.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Dude, I run a 4E game. MY game has a compelling story because I'm a storyteller by nature. D&D as a product, however, lacks a compelling story to draw a wide swath of people into the world from outside the game.

This isn't about individual, private games, this is about the product as expressed by the designers, the marketers, and the tie-in products.

Ah ok, i see what you mean now.

Yes, maybe a comic would do the trick. The drow initiative... i am not sure. I hope it works out. Games that somehow connect. Maybe. Hopefully so.

 

[Savage Wombat]

Part of the reason the Pokemon cartoon does so well is that it serves as a "tutorial" of sorts for the massively complex game.

A D&D cartoon might want to include that basic structure - making it clear that wizards prepare spells (and their names), rogues getting sneak attack, trolls can only be killed with fire and acid, and the like.

 

[Janaxstrus]

Part of the reason the Pokemon cartoon does so well is that it serves as a "tutorial" of sorts for the massively complex game.

A D&D cartoon might want to include that basic structure - making it clear that wizards prepare spells (and their names), rogues getting sneak attack, trolls can only be killed with fire and acid, and the like.

I would watch D&D cartoons. My daughter watches the old ones with me all the time. She may even like them more than I do, but for different reasons (stupid Uni)

 

[Kzach]

Part of the reason the Pokemon cartoon does so well is that it serves as a "tutorial" of sorts for the massively complex game.

A D&D cartoon might want to include that basic structure - making it clear that wizards prepare spells (and their names), rogues getting sneak attack, trolls can only be killed with fire and acid, and the like.

Yeah, this is what I was trying to get at by saying it should be well-considered and carefully planned to tie-in with the D&D P&P game. I just couldn't articulate it well

As long as that is done in a way that doesn't detract from the story, characterisation, etc. so that the cartoon is good enough to become popular on its own merits, then it could draw in a lot more players, albeit young ones

 

[hanez]

Yeah, but it does work with 4e. Compelling story has nothing to do with the game system. Adventures may be lacking in parts, but if you had no compelling stories at all in the last few years, it is rather a problem with your gaming group, not with withards of the coast.

Completely disagree. Sure a huge burden is placed on the DM and players to make a great story. But a huge burden is also placed on the rules to encourage the group to work together to make that story, to stimulate imagination to be more then encounters strung together, to allow all heroes of all types to fit within the system. To make the game not random and chaotic, but also not boring and monotonous.

I see this, "if you had boring campaigns its never the fault of the rules" thing time and time again and I couldnt disagree more.

Read monte cookes arcana evolved where the fluff keeps hittin you in the face again and again, you cant help but be drawn into montes world. I expect the rules to do that to my players, because many of them come to the table not knowing what an elf really is, or what a cleric is and I need game material (mechanical and fluffy, and BOTH) to help them find out.

And if a ruleset specifically focuses on balanbce at the expense of differentiation in classes, if it focuses on combat at the expense of social aspects, if its corresponding official adventures relegate the stories to a seperate book and make the meat a bunch of encounters, if its powers/spells are just numbers with most of the words removed, then some playstyles (like mine) will be negatively effected. And it will be at least in part the fault of the rules.

I didnt just turn into a completely different DM when we switched back to AD&D. I didnt use completely different ideas or brainstorming methods for my adventures. My players are more drawn into the story in that system because there is more focus on fluff, less focus on balance and mechanics, more free form and less tactics. This may vary for other groups, indeed it will vary, but to say rules dont effect the story is silly in my view.


(edit - no idea how this post/line of discussion ended up in a threat about the D&D brand).

 

[UngeheuerLich]

4e is so much fun in combat and has so much rules, yes, it is dangerous to be drawn into the minibattle very easily. Still you can tell your stories. Everything is there.

You are however right: presentation of the rules, in rulebooks with fluff and in adventures is more important.

Classes for example in 4e are balanced and diverse, but on paper they look quite the same. Rituals are a great out of combat tool, but are not integrated well enough. The power structure and the ease of use makes improvising hard (as improvising is too often the inferior option)

At least you say, you go back to ADnD: there the thief for example has to improvise all the time. As he lacks good options by the rules. The wizard has spells that can be used in many different ways. This is indeed something i miss in 3.5 and upwards.

So can you tell a good story with 4e? Yes. Can You tell it more easily with ADnD? Maybe. Because if you don´t tell a story, unbalanced combats will spoil the fun pretty easily.
I hope D&D next will have both: solid rules for combat, with a lot of options to improvise, in and out of combat.

Oh, and in the seminar maybe the biggest problem was touched: Players in 4e are too much empowered. A legacy from 3.x. This is maybe the biggest issue with the rules that prevent the telling of stories.